News feminist philosophers can use

We knew this already but… August 25, 2009

…the Observer provides some up to date statistics on the dismal underrepresentation of women in top FTSE 350 jobs in the UK (perhaps useful for the start of term if you want to present your feminist philosophy class with some empirical stuff on gender inequality).

I found interesting the tactic Harriet Harman is using to press for more equal representation:

A company in the grip of the old-boy network is never going to be successful in the modern world. If they can’t see half the population as worthy of a say, then they are in the grip of structural prejudice. What does it say about a company that they have an all-male board? It is backward-looking and old-fashioned.”

First, the stats in the linked article are gathered not by Harriet Harman, but by Co-operative Asset Management.

Second, the link you provide, randy, is to a website that involves all manner of falsehoods about feminism, and about Harriet Harman – such as that feminists hate men, and that Harman’s intention is to stir up hatred against men.
Many feminists (including Harman, I should aver) intend nothing of the sort: gender equality can be better for women and better for men.

Third, your claim that we can look to (low) rape conviction rates as evidence of the falsity of many rape allegations wholly fails to take into account the immense difficulties in securing convictions for rape, as well as the documented (and discussed here) problems and inadequacies in current evidence gathering practices, when a rape is reported, in many parts of the UK.

Obviously, you are entitled to your own opinion about the merits of Harriet Harman’s political views, but it is a damn shame if those opinions are founded on falsehoods and misconceptions about the aims of feminism. I hope you take some time to look around this blog and have some of those misconceptions dispelled.